Athletic Performance, Warm-Up Exercise
Conditions
Keywords
core activation, youth football, technical performance, crossover design, post-activation performance enhancement, warm-up
Brief summary
This study examined whether a brief, low-load core activation warm-up would acutely improve football-specific technical performance compared with a conventional dynamic warm-up in male youth football players. Twenty-four players (aged 15-16 years) completed both warm-up conditions in a single-session, counterbalanced crossover design separated by a 10-minute passive recovery period. Following each warm-up, players performed standardised tests of dribbling speed, passing accuracy, shooting accuracy, and ball control. The study was designed as an exploratory pilot to estimate effect sizes and inform the design of a future definitive trial.
Detailed description
Warm-up routines in football increasingly incorporate neuromuscular activation components; however, evidence regarding the acute effects of core activation on football-specific technical performance in youth players remains limited. This single-session, counterbalanced crossover study randomly assigned 24 male youth football players (age: 15.6 ± 0.5 years) to one of two condition sequences (core activation first or conventional warm-up first) using a computer-generated random number list with a 1:1 allocation ratio. Both warm-up protocols were duration-matched (\ 8-10 minutes). The core activation protocol consisted of body-weight exercises targeting anterior, lateral, and posterior trunk musculature (front plank, side plank, glute bridge, dead bug, bird-dog). The conventional warm-up consisted of dynamic mobility and low-intensity running drills. Following each warm-up condition, players completed standardised assessments of dribbling time (slalom test), passing accuracy (target-based test), shooting accuracy (target-based test), and ball control (first-touch control test). A 10-minute passive recovery period separated the two conditions. Linear mixed models with condition, period, and sequence as fixed effects and participant as a random intercept were used for analysis. The study was not powered for equivalence or non-inferiority testing and was conceived as feasibility evidence for a subsequent definitive multi-session trial.
Interventions
OTHERCore Activation Warm-Up
A brief (\~8-10 min) body-weight core activation protocol consisting of front plank (2x25s), side plank (2x20s each side), glute bridge (2x10 reps), dead bug (2x8 reps each side), and bird-dog (2x8 reps each side), with 10-15 s rest between sets.
OTHERConventional Dynamic Warm-Up
A duration-matched (\~8-10 min) conventional warm-up consisting of dynamic leg swings, walking lunges, high knees, butt kicks, and low-intensity running drills.
Sponsors
Inonu University
Manisa Celal Bayar University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
All participants completed both conditions (core activation warm-up and conventional warm-up) in a single session separated by a 10-minute passive recovery period. Condition order was counterbalanced using a computer-generated random number list with a 1:1 allocation ratio (Sequence AB: core activation first; Sequence BA: conventional first).
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
MALE
Age
15 Years to 16 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Male youth football players registered in an organised football academy * Minimum of 2 years of football training history * Regular participation in training (≥3 sessions per week) * Free from acute musculoskeletal injury at the time of testing
Exclusion criteria
* History of lower limb, trunk, or spinal injury within 6 months prior to testing * Participation in a competitive match or high-intensity training within 48 hours prior to testing
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Passing Accuracy | Within 3-5 minutes after each warm-up condition | Accuracy percentage from a target-based passing test (6 passes from 10 m toward a 1.5 m-wide target). Higher percentage indicates better performance. |
| Shooting Accuracy | Within 3-5 minutes after each warm-up condition | Accuracy percentage from a target-based shooting test (5 shots from 11 m toward 1x1 m corner targets). Higher percentage indicates better performance. |
| Ball Control | Within 3-5 minutes after each warm-up condition | Total successful first-touch contacts within a 2x2 m area in a standardised ball control test. Higher count indicates better performance. |
| Dribbling Time | Within 3-5 minutes after each warm-up condition | Time to complete a standardised slalom dribbling test (8 cones, 2 m apart). Best of 2 trials recorded in seconds using a handheld stopwatch. Lower time indicates better performance. |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed